Twenty Years of Change : A Systematic Literature Review of Indonesian Teachers’ Responses to Curriculum Change

: This study investigates Indonesian teachers' responses to curriculum changes over the past twenty years, involving four curriculum changes. This study employed a qualitative approach, conducting a systematic literature review conforming to PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Utilizing databases such as Scopus, ERIC, EBSCO, ProQuest, Taylor & Francis, Science Direct, and Google Scholar with selection criteria focused on empirical studies capturing Indonesian teacher's responses toward curriculum changes within the last 20 years (2003-2023). Screening and quality assessment resulted in 26 studies for detailed content analysis. The findings showed teachers’ general openness and acceptance of new curricula, yet this does not translate into effective implementation and reliance on traditional methods. Persistent difficulties include struggles applying student-centered learning, developing learning material, authentic assessment, digital proficiency, and tailored curriculum. These challenges were attributed to inadequate training, resource constraints, student difficulties, cultural factors, and teacher practical competence. This review implied the need to shift schools and local government towards hands-on in-service teacher training and for policymakers to enhance effectiveness through a system of monitoring and incentives. It also suggested a re-evaluation of pre-service training and teacher recruitment criteria, ensuring teachers were equipped for transforming educational practices in Indonesia.


Introduction
Over the past twenty years, Indonesia has experienced significant educational transformations with four major curriculum changes, including the 2004 Competition-Based Curriculum (KBK), the 2006 Education-Unit Level Curriculum (KTSP), the 2013 curriculum, and the most recent introduced by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology (MOECRT) of the Republic of Indonesia, Merdeka curriculum in 2022 (Mukminin et al., 2019;MOECRT, 2022a).These reforms, aiming at a shift from teachercentered to student-centered learning, intended to provide schools and teachers more autonomy in teaching methods and curriculum decisions, thereby equipping students with skills relevant for the future (Suryadi & Budimansyah, 2016;Rahmadayanti & Hartoyo, 2022).However, the implementation of these changes has not been without challenges.
The phrase "Ganti Menteri, Ganti Kurikulum" ("New Minister, New Curriculum") captures the widely held perception that such change is often politically motivated in educational policy, which leads to instability and frustration among educators, affecting their ability to adapt and effectively implement new curricula (Catherine & Prabowo, 2022;MOECRT, 2022b;Alhamuddin et al., 2020).Once these curriculum changes were introduced, Indonesian teachers often faced challenges adapting to new practices data and searching for themes to capture important information.Each article underwent a manual review to confirm its relevance, with keywords and themes extracted.

Results and Discussion
Spanning from 2005 to 2023, the research encapsulates nearly two decades of scholarly work, displaying a notable surge in publications from 2016, peaking in 2021 and 2022.This trend suggests an escalating interest in the field, potentially reflecting evolving paradigms and emerging challenges within educational psychology.Methodologically, the studies exhibit a rich diversity: qualitative methods dominate with 14 articles, emphasizing an in-depth, context-sensitive exploration of educational phenomena, followed by seven articles employing mixed methods, integrating qualitative depth with quantitative breadth, and quantitative approaches are used in five articles.Three studies focused on KBK or competency-based curriculum in 2004, 2 studies on KTSP in 2006, 16 studies in curriculum 2013, and 5 studies on the Merdeka curriculum.A summary of retained articles can be found in Table 1.Qualitative Teachers' responses to the curriculum were mixed, with some adopting innovative and mathematics practices.In contrast, others reverted to traditional methods due to student challenges and struggle with real-life context on certain topic.Maba (2017); Maba & Mantra (2018), K-13 Denpasar, teachers, and headmaster; 10 teachers Qualitative Teachers appreciated the 2013 curriculum's thorough assessment approach but struggled with its practical execution and complex reporting.There are discrepancies between planned lessons and actual implementation, alongside limitations in their understanding and competence.

Mixedmethod
Teachers recognize the importance of effective classroom management but face challenges in implementing it.Attributed to large class size, lack of technological competence, insufficient school facilities, and student discipline issues.Prasetyono et al. (2021), K-13 Jabodetabek, 26 high school and vocational school teachers, 420 students

Mixedmethod
Teachers face inconsistencies in teaching approaches due to the implementation of dual curricula.At the same time, also struggle to utilize the 2013 curriculum effectively because of limited facilities, guidance, teacher competencies, and reliance on traditional teaching methods to develop more effective student engagement in learning tasks.Pratiwi et al. (2020)

Mixedmethod
Teachers face challenges like understanding the concept and how to implement it, translating its component (CP, TP, ATP), creating Modul Ajar, all with limited IT skills, and pressure to adapt.They also seek more school supervision and feedback.Werdiningsih et al. (2022), KM

Mixedmethod
Most teachers actively implement and view KM as fair, recognizing its potential benefit despite some challenges.40% with note the curriculum brings sufficient improvement, 37% see significant benefits, and the minority report minimal gain.
Note KM is the Merdeka curriculum.K-13 is 2013 curriculum.Some of the study titles are compressed due to limited space.

Teachers perception and respond to curriculum changes
Acceptance but major gap in implementation.Indonesian teachers have expressed mixed responses to curriculum changes over the last two decades.Generally, each time a new curriculum was introduced (KBK, KTSP, K-13, and Merdeka curriculum), teachers perceive the change with willingness, openness, and acceptance to try to implement.Such as acknowledging the benefits of the new curriculum in making the student more motivated during K-13 (Arrafii, 2021) and showing enthusiasm for potential creativity and autonomy offered by Kurmer (Mustofa et al., 2023).Teachers also show a willingness to collaborate with peers to develop lesson plans (Saito et al., 2006) and positively engage in implementing curricula such as K-13 (Rusman, 2015;Gunawan, 2017;Muazza et al., 2019;Werdiningsih et al., 2022).
However, these acceptances are often accompanied by gaps and surface-level implementation.Teachers consistently faced practical challenges when it came to the actual implementation of curriculum.Some teachers claim to understand the new curriculum but are lost in actual classroom implementation and end up returning to former practice (Utomo, 2005).Difficulties they face lead to reluctance and inability to implement effectively (Diem, 2016), skepticism viewing the new curriculum as vague (Mustofa et al., 2023), pessimism viewing the barriers as irremovable (Basalama, 2010), and disengagement viewing new method as irrelevant to their condition (Puad, 2022).Furthermore, teachers may feel anxious about upcoming curriculum change, since they feel not fully mastered implementing previous curriculum yet, but the new one is coming already (Chodijah, 2012).With such challenges, responses, and perceptions, most teachers end up reverting to traditional teaching practices (Arrafii, 2021; Burhanuddin & Arrafii, 2022;Pratiwi et al., 2020;Hasibuan et al., 2021;Prasetyono et al., 2021;Qoyyimah, 2018).This reversion indicates either a resistance to change or a coping mechanism for dealing with the complexities and demands of the new curriculum.However, these findings highlight the need for more supportive, structured, and realistic planning based on teachers' understanding and practical ability in curriculum development and implementation.
Persistent Difficulties.Most studies found that teachers responded to curriculum changes by confronting a range of persistent difficulties which have shown a consistent pattern over time, including the struggle to implement student-centered learning approaches, the development of learning material, instruments, and lesson plans, create authentic assessments, maintain digital proficiency, and formulate school-based curricula.Teachers have consistently struggled with the adoption of student-centered methods due to unfamiliarity.They struggle with reflecting the approach into syllabi, mastering discussionbased techniques, and handling students' prevalent passive learning tendencies (Saito et al., 2006;Diem, 2016;Chodijah, 2012;Basalama, 2010;Prasetyono et al., 2021;Maba, 2017;Faridi et al., 2016).The development of learning materials with evolving curricula and incorporation of higher-order thinking skills has also been a hurdle.Covering how to break down indicators to instruction, utilizing learning media, and adapting materials to students' comprehension level (Basalama, 2010;Damayanti, 2022;Pratiwi, 2020;Muazza et al., 2019).
Although most teachers recognized the importance of authentic assessment, many struggled with developing rubrics, unfamiliar scoring systems, and facilitating formative peer assessment (Utomo, 2005;Arrafii, 2021).Digital proficiency, particularly in resource-limited areas, and the lack of competence in digital technologies have also posed significant obstacles (Reza et al., 2023;Alliyah, 2023;Muazza et al., 2019;Prasetyono et al., 2021).Finally, teachers express a lack of clear guidance, often resulting in schools copying curricula without customizing them to their context (Utomo, 2005;Chodijah, 2012) and difficulties in tailoring lesson objectives like CP, TP, and ATP in the Merdeka curriculum to match students' needs (Damayanti & Muhroji, 2022).

Teachers' Practice Resilience and Innovative
Despite challenges, some Indonesian teachers have shown resilience and innovation.Basalama (2010) discovered that one-third of 'empowered' identity teachers used selfevaluation questionnaires to address students' needs and improve teaching.In Malang City, teachers exhibited resilience in implementing K-13, engaging in training, forming lesson study groups, and undertaking clinical supervision to adapt to the curriculum's scientific approach (Gunawan, 2017).Teachers simplified complex concepts to give students real-life examples (Hidayat & Setyawan, 2020).In Bandung, they developed innovative learning implementation plans and monitored student progress with methods like "star" stickers for positive reinforcement (Rusman, 2015).Teachers formed working groups, attended training, and conducted online research to implement Merdeka curriculum (Damayanti & Muhroji, 2022).Revert to Traditional Teaching However, a dominant trend found in this review has been teachers reverting to traditional practices in response to curriculum reforms.Basalama (2010), Hasibuan et al. (2019), and Qoyyimah (2018) cite resource limitations as a contributing external factor.Inadequate materials, lack of support, and limited professional opportunities are significant barriers.Mustofa (2023) highlights a need for more understanding and support for the Merdeka curriculum reform, leading to skepticism.The complexity of lesson concepts also drives teachers to rely on traditional methods (Chodidjah, 2012;Pratiwi et al., 2020).Internally, teachers' personal beliefs about students' inability to adapt to new teaching and their comfort with familiar teacher-centered methods significantly influence this reversion (Basalama, 2010;Diem, 2016).Limited skills in student-centered techniques, interactive discussion, and the integration of new methods like inquiry-based contribute to their reliance on traditional methods (Diem, 2016;Pratiwi et al., 2020;Hidayat & Setyawan, 2020).

Teachers' main challenges implementing curriculum Training Constrain
Most studies identified lack of training as either attributed to challenges teachers faced or as a recommendation for successful curriculum change.Practical training is essential for successful curriculum changes in Indonesia as it could improve teachers' decision-making and curriculum adaptation skills (Qoyyimah, 2018;2020).However, in-service teachers also report that training sessions are often emphasized on theory and misaligned with their practical needs (Basalama, 2010;Arrafii, 2021;Suyanto, 2017;Retnawati et al., 2016).A gap exists even in pre-service training, where student teachers feel unprepared for practical classroom applications (Dirgantoro & Soesanto, 2023).This disparity leaves many Indonesian teachers unprepared for classroom realities (Revina et al., 2020).
Government efforts to improve teaching competencies are often seen as inadequate (Arrafii, 2021;Maba, 2017) and lack supervision to guide teachers during implementation (Reza et al., 2023;Pratiwi et al., 2020).Teachers attend training for certification portfolios (Diem, 2016) rather than genuine professional development.Kusumawardhani (2017) notes that the high job security of teachers as civil servants can lead to a lower prioritization of performance enhancement.This observation is supported by Setiawati (2020), who reports no significant difference in teaching quality between certified and non-certified teachers despite salary discrepancies.

Student Concerns
Large class sizes and varied student abilities complicate classroom management and the implementation of student-centered approaches (Basalama, 2010;Hasibuan et al., 2019;Arrafii, 2021), with some facing real students' disciplinary issues (Muazza et al., 2019) and misbehavior (Qoyyimah 2018;2020).Teachers perceive many students as having low learning capacities and motivation and being passive in class (Basalama, 2010;Arrafii, 2021;Faridi et al., 2016), which hinders innovative teaching approaches.Additionally, students showed a preference for teacher-guided learning also conflicts with curricular aims for autonomous learning (Basalama, 2010).

Culture and Teacher Competence
The influence of traditional values and institutional demands also limits teachers' autonomy and agency, affecting their engagement and investment in new teaching methods (Basalama, 2010;Saito et al., 2006;Diem, 2016;Chodijah, 2012).Top-down policy in Indonesia leads to disconnection from policy directives and difficulties in embracing changes (Utomo, 2005;Puad & Ashton, 2022).Strong hierarchical between teachers and students hinder formative assessment practice and perceived as foreign (Puad & Ashton, 2022).The dynamic between junior and senior teachers also found to play a role where junior teachers often lack confidence in front of seniors, impacting their ability to implement new teaching approaches (Basalama, 2010).
Furthermore, while most factors discussed are external, there is inevitably an internal factor at play, which is teacher competence, that has been found repeatedly across studies.Both junior and senior teachers struggle with student-centered approaches (Werdiningsih et al., 2022;Utomo, 2005;Diem, 2016;Alliyah, 2023).Fundamental aspects of teaching competencies, such as mastering variations of teaching methods such as interactive discussion and engaging students, are found to be constant hurdles (Utomo, 2005;Diem, 2016;Faridi et al., 2016;Prasetyono et al., 2021).Teachers need help to engage passive students (Faridi et al., 2016) but also feel overwhelmed managing active ones (Saito, 2006).Moreover, discrepancies were found between planned lessons, claimed understanding, and actual implementation (Utomo, 2005;Maba, 2017;Maba & Mantra, 2017;Suyanto, 2017).Zulfikar (2010) reports that Indonesian teachers lack teaching competence, often ascribed to the long tradition of teacher-centered teaching and rote learning in Indonesian classrooms.The pedagogical ability of teachers is often neglected during recruitment and evaluation, resulting in poor student academic achievement (Zulfikar, 2010).

Conclusion
In the past 20 years, Indonesia has had curriculum changes with teachers who have shown a mix of openness and acceptance but with surface-level implementation.Despite some teachers demonstrating resilience in their attempt to apply curriculum policy, the majority continue to struggle, reverting to traditional methods due to persistent challenges.The persistent pattern found during adopting student-centered learning, developing learning material, lesson plans, authentic assessments, school-based curriculum, and digital proficiency.Teachers often attribute curriculum implementation difficulties to external factors like limited resources, student challenges, and cultural barriers, with many studies highlighting inadequate training as a critical concern.However, teachers perceive those training as too theoretical and lack effectiveness in enhancing their practical classroom skills, highlighting the need for a more practical, hands-on approach.
Thus, reflecting on persistent practical challenges faced by teachers, the minimal impact of training, and the prevalent reliance on traditional teaching over time, it becomes evident that a more realistic and practical-based approach is needed to support teachers in classroom implementation.Furthermore, a consistent pattern of teachers attempting but failing to overcome obstacles and implement new curricula, regardless of experience, school level, and region over twenty years, calls for a more systemic re-evaluation of teacher recruitment and pre-service training processes.

Recommendation
To address the curriculum, change challenges faced by Indonesian teachers, a two-pronged strategy is suggested.First, schools and local governments need to reorient in-service teacher training towards practical, hands-on methods that align with real classroom experiences.This shift may include specialized workshops focusing on real-life teaching scenarios related to the new curriculum, complemented by targeted evaluations, immediate feedback, and collaboration universities, NGOs, and local organizations to provide additional practical training resources.Second, it is recommended that policymakers systematically establish continuous monitoring and incentives to encourage effectiveness in in-service and pre-service training.Moreover, refining recruitment criteria is needed to ensure teachers are equipped with necessary, adaptable competencies for the evolving educational landscape.

Table 1 . Analysis of Studies Capturing Teachers' Responses Towards Curriculum Change
Quantitative Teachers' perceptions of curriculum change are still in the "selection stage," where they know and still choose aspects to adopt but have not yet reached the stage of understanding and integration into daily teaching.
Qualitative Public school teachers, backed by government support, effectively applied diverse strategies in character education, while resource-limited private school teachers relied on copied lesson plans and reactive approaches focusing on student misbehavior.Qualitative Teachers did not fully comprehend the assessment system within the new curriculum.They found it challenging to navigate the four scales rubric of competencies, conversing value to verbal scoring, while lack of training and socialization.Qualitative Teachers have made an effort to implement such as creating a working group, attend have made an effort to implement such as creating a working group, attending training, and looking for references on the internet.However, they still lack understanding and face difficulties compiling thematic learning instruments (Bloom's taxonomy indicators).